Files

Abstract

Analysis Summary: 1. Potential shift in the executive/legislative balance of power and potential conflict with other provisions of the Iowa Consortium. 2. Process to access "rainy day" funds under SJR 1 appears to be substantively different from current Iowa Code. 3. Iowa's current financial position is more attributable to state sales and use tax increase than 99 percent expenditure rule. 4. The proposed Amendment and existing statutory 99 percent expenditure rule remain untested by circumstances other than robust economic conditions. 5. Allocation of any surplus revenues to the GAAP Reduction Account is dropped. 6. A minority of 21 votes in the Senate may defeat a question involving a tax increase. Reduced flexibility for state government response during cycle of political economy. 7. Probable consequences of the 60 percent voting rule include reductions in spending growth for functions of state government, state aid to local government and increase in property taxes and other local taxes. 8. Among the surrounding states, only South Dakota imposes a supermajority requirement for increasing taxes. No supermajority requirements are imposed in 36 states; only 11 states apply a supermajority requirement to all state taxes. 9. Incentive for developing special purpose funds and for earmarking state revenues. 10. Iowa's tax burden relatively flat over four decades. Dramatic increase not likely. Appears to be lack of compelling arguments for proposed amendment over status quo statutory policies already in effect.

Details

PDF

Statistics

from
to
Export
Download Full History